There's such a massive awareness online of how evil the Daily Mail is and how it constantly lies (including claims of interviewing people and using quotes when they didn't even contact them) sensationalises and takes things out of context, and it is all of course justified, but I can't understand how despite this the paper remains so influential. I suppose most of their readers must be 50+ and not particularly online much. Although there are a lot of people my age that I have seen reading the online site at school etc for their fantastic hard-hitting celebrity pieces which are mostly photos and three lines of text, so I suppose they have some influence there with the celebrity distractions. Maybe the constant furore and outrage actually continues to make them popular and well-read? I don't know.

I think you're projecting your social experiences onto your expectation of the population.

The site is hugely popular with all ages, internationally and especially with females (who are the key demographic) - just perhaps not the type you may interact with.

They have so much influence because their strategy is bang on target for what they want to do, provide the passive majority with what they want to read, and profit from it. A LOT of people only want to read someone reaffirming their own views.

bmstinton93 wrote:I actually detest Apple's products. You can get much better for much cheaper.

Fixed that for you.

VivAyrshire on UM wrote:It just reminded me of this dreadful female called Yudster (cm.net / aled.info), who would spend all day just fussing over grammar points, and doing nothing constructive of any kind.

bmstinton93 wrote:Edit: And iTunes can't be beaten for me either actually.

For what? In terms of storing music, why do you need anything other than your favourite OS shell? For playing, I find VLC far better than most things including iTunes, which is a huge memory hog (or was last time I used it on Windows).

Deadly wrote:

Topher wrote:Stuff about Thatcher....

You are a disgrace and I'm looking forward to when someone you respect dies so I can rub your liberal face in it.

My cymba (upper ear hollow) is larger than my cavum (lower ear hollow), a feature possessed by only 1–2% of the Caucasian population. My brother is the same. Most earphones either fall out almost instantly or rattle when I walk, which is most annoying.

not wanting to sound daft, but have you tried 'bud type' earphones? I always used to have massive problems with exactly the problem you describe, falling out etc. But bud type cure this issue, for me, anyway.

Nicola_Red wrote:My cymba (upper ear hollow) is larger than my cavum (lower ear hollow), a feature possessed by only 1–2% of the Caucasian population. My brother is the same. Most earphones either fall out almost instantly or rattle when I walk, which is most annoying.

dimtimjim wrote:not wanting to sound daft, but have you tried 'bud type' earphones? I always used to have massive problems with exactly the problem you describe, falling out etc. But bud type cure this issue, for me, anyway.

Do you mean this type:

If so, they won't stay in my ears for even a second The ones I use look like this:

No, admittedly I haven't. Maybe if I tried smaller ones they would work. I mean I'm fine with the ones I use at the moment, but if they get discontinued or amazon stop stocking them I'd be stuffed. Also they're probably not the best sound quality in the world.

Yet, sometimes I get messages from numbers my phone doesn't recognise, So, obviously I text back to enquire who it is. Then get greeted with an upset/annoyed message 'cos I don't know who they are!!! YOU CHANGED YOUR NUMBER *! NOT ME!

Only confirmed by the fact I will have stored for you: Person, PersonNew, PersonNew2, PersonNew3 etc etc. Yet here you are getting all offended...